You may enjoy companion articles:
NFL Draft 2011: Statistically Looking for Elite
"Speed" RBs, and Recent RB Historical Ratings
and
NFL Draft 2011: Statistically Looking for Elite
"Power RBs", and Recent RB Historical Ratings -
Fantasy Football 2011
The focus on Mark Ingram this NFL
Draft season, is like the old Eddie Murphy
bit (remember the concert/movie "Raw"...back in
his prime?) about the starving man on a desert
island who gets a cracker. Trying not to step
all over the joke (or get into the tawdry
parts), but the summary was -- being offered a
plain cracker to eat is no big deal normally,
but the same otherwise dull cracker given to a
starving man on a desert island...the starving
man goes wild for it and raves about how it's
the greatest cracker he's ever had. A giant leap
to connect that analogy to Mark Ingram
and the 2011 Draft -- I think because there are
no seemingly obvious star RBs available in the
draft (although, I see at least one), fans/media
are leaning too much on Mark Ingram as
their "hopeful" elite RB...and I think that is a
stretch.
Let's compare Mark Ingram to a "mystery"
RB for a moment:
- This "mystery" RB has slightly
bigger hands and longer arms compared to
Ingram
- This "mystery" RB had essentially
the same Bench Press as Ingram, actually 1
more rep better
- Despite the fact that this "mystery"
RB is 15 pounds heavier, and he ran a faster
40-yard dash and almost identical 10-yard
dashes (and that is taking Ingram's best
scores from his pro-day, and skipping over
his very poor NFL Combine results). Being 15
pounds larger and as fast/faster is a big
advantage to the "mystery" RB
- The "mystery" RB had a near elite
level Vertical Jump, while Ingram a very
underwhelming Vertical measurement
- The "mystery" RB had a very solid
shuttle drill time, and a more elite level
3-cone drill measurement (agility
drills)....whereas Ingram was awful in the
shuttle drill and mediocre in the 3-cone --
summary, "mystery" RB is
(theoretically) much more agile than
Ingram...again the "mystery" BR is more
agile despite being 15 pounds heavier, which
is a great NFL-translatable advantage.
The "mystery" RB is much better
physically across the board, understanding
Ingram had some 2010 preseason injury issues --
so maybe the gap is closer...maybe not. Ingram
fans are likely shouting at this point, "yes,
but what about the his dominance on the field"!
OK, let's compare Ingram's best year 2009 (not
2010) to the "mystery" RB's best season
(and I am throwing out games against awful
competition -- for Ingram it was 2009 matchups
against Chattanooga, North Texas, and Fla
International and there was 1 game out for the "mystery"
RB):
- The "mystery" RB played in a
"Power Conference", and after adjusting the
1 game he had against a terrible
opponent...he played 1 more game than Ingram
for the comparison
- The "mystery" RB ran for more
yards per game than Ingram (146.5 per game
vs. 128.0)
- Including receiving yards, the "mystery"
RB had 158.9 yards per game, and Ingram
150.7
- The "mystery" RB had double
the rushing TDs as Ingram
- Ingram had 5.8 yards per carry, besting
the "mystery" RB who had 5.5 yards
per carry...both very good numbers
Looking at their 4 toughest games on their
schedule (within the season we are comparing):
- The "mystery" RB ran for 164.8
yards per game, to Ingram's 130.7
- The "mystery" RB had 10 TDs, to
Ingram's 6
- The "mystery" RB had 5.2 yards
per carry, Ingram had 5.3 yards per carry
The "mystery" RB had knee issues and
had to redshirt a season. The "mystery"
RB also played on the baseball team.
Have you a guess as to who this RB is?
The main point about this comparison is what
media over exposure (and a Heisman) can do. Some
act as if they have never seen a RB like Mark
Ingram, and they think their team must land
him in the 2011 Draft at all costs to cure their
NFL team's running woes. If a GM of an NFL team
thinks Ingram is a "savior" and reaches high in
the Draft for him, it could be a major mistake
and over-spend.
The "mystery" RB? He played his best
season in 2009 as well. He probably should/could
have been the 2009 Heisman trophy winner, but if
not for a heavier southern/eastern TV/media
constant exposure (my opinion). No one got too
worked up/excited about this "mystery" RB
in last year's Draft. Did anyone really care
that much about the 2nd Round pick (#51 overall)
in 2010 for the Vikings -- Toby Gerhart?
Was anyone "waxing poetic" about how Toby
Gerhart was a "savior" for their team in the
2010 Draft? Toby Gerhart's resume' is
every bit the equal (I think better) as Mark
Ingram's...yet, Ingram is "awesome" and no one
seemingly cares about Gerhart. Perhaps they will
both go on to be excellent...or both bad, my
main point is -- psychologically, some are
elevating Ingram higher because the media is
nudging it that way (nudging it not with an
agenda, just lazy).
We elevate Ingram, yet we ignored Gerhart
because the mainstream media didn't push him
(whether in the Draft, or for the Heisman).
Emotions and over-exposure are getting the best
of some of us, because if you do the
homework...you should be as excited (or as not
excited) about Ingram as you were Gerhart. My
bet would be that most do not hold Ingram and
Gerhart in an equal regard in their mind...and
to me it's psychological/emotional, not
rational.
Mark Ingram scares me...
When we did the analysis on Ingram, we first
leaned on the 2011 NFL Combine results and his
2010 performance...and the analysis was bad.
Understanding that Ingram had injury issues, we
went back and re-did the numbers based on his
Heisman year of 2009...which improved things,
but the NFL Combine numbers were so weak he
still projected as a bust/mediocre Pro. We gave
him another benefit of the doubt by taking the
improved Pro-Day measurements ahead of the NFL
Combine -- we took the best of Mark Ingram and
he crawled into a projection of mediocre/good in
the NFL, a long shot elite.
If we didn't take Ingram's absolute best
data, he would project to be a flat out bust. We
have been burned on injured college RBs like
Frank Gore and Arian Foster...who
had weak physical measurements pre-Draft, but
recovered and improved to better things (than
our system analysis projected) in the NFL. Near
impossible to predict, but for every Frank
Gore...there are several injury-bug RBs who
we barely remember, or who never "made it" in
the NFL.
But, what if the NFL Combine measurements are
true representation of Ingram's current/future
physical skills/status? Maybe the injury has set
him back permanently? The questions on all of
this would scare me to death on taking him in
the first round of the draft. I would be
especially scared when RBs tend to "grow on
trees" to a degree; and have short shelf-lives.
I would have to defy and overlook a lot of logic
to use up a valuable 1st Round pick to take
Ingram. Missing out on a good/great Quarterback
in the NFL Draft is devastating (if you don't
have one already)...but, missing out on a
good/great RB -- who cares? There are plenty
more RBs floating around as free-agents, or in
the mid-to-late draft, or as undrafted
free-agents. Ingram just doesn't present a
compelling enough business case to reach into
the 1st Round for him....he just seems 1st Round
worthy because of all the attention and name
recognition, which is unfair to the many more
sound RB prospects in this Draft.
Ingram is "fait accompli", the
no-brainer #1 RB in the media; so don't bother
to even question it...except, our mathematical
analysis fully questions it. The more I look,
the more I believe...there are more questions on
Ingram than we are led to believe. It would
surprise me if the Patriots drafted him, as is
reported...we'll see tonight.
The NFL RB that is the
best match of Mark Ingram in our system:
Looking through the system for "power RBs"
that were physically mediocre-to-good overall on
physical measureables, but with weaker agility
metrics and higher "power" metrics; as well as
top tier on-field performance -- Cedric
Benson may be the best fit, with some signs
of Tim Hightower. Characteristics of
Toby Gerhart made some sense, but Gerhart is
just measuring much better physically.
Maurice Clarett has some things in common,
but Clarett's physical measureables were too far
worse than Ingram's weaker measureables (and
Clarett worse than about every college RB
prospect in recent years).
LEGEND FOR RATINGS:
- SPEED = a combination of speed
measurements from the NFL Combine/Pro-Days,
measured against our database on similar
WRs
- AGILITY = a combination of
agility test measurements from the NFL
Combine/Pro-Days, measured against our database on similar WRs
- POWER = a combination of
various physical measurements, measured
against our database on similar RBs
- HANDS = a combination of
performance metrics and physical metrics to
grade "hands" -- not only an ability to catch the ball
as a receiver, but for fumble potential as
well. A
unique/private metric of ours. We gave hands
a "grade", but receiving wasn't a huge part
of the analysis -- rushing/running ability
is what we focused on.
*school grade system, A+ being the best in
class historically all the way to F- as
historically the worst combination of metrics --
all based on what WRs with those measurements
did (or didn't do) in the NFL.
|
Name |
College |
Yr |
40-Yard |
Speed |
Agility |
Power |
Hands |
|
Ingram, Mark |
Alabama |
2011 |
4.53 |
B |
C+ |
A- |
A- |
|
Hightower, Tim |
Richmond |
2008 |
4.59 |
B- |
C- |
A- |
B |
|
Benson, Cedric |
Texas |
2005 |
4.62 |
C+ |
D |
A- |
C |
Mark Ingram Overall
System Score = +0.741
* See this story for background on our system
scoring methodology for "Power RBs" --
NFL Draft 2011: Statistically Looking for Elite
"Power RBs", and Recent RB Historical Ratings -
Fantasy Football 2011
2011 NFL DRAFT Outlook
for Mark Ingram
Ingram is a bit of a "tween-er" in our
system, and that's a bad place to be for him --
he's measuring too slow/not agile enough to be
an elite "speed RB" and he is not big/powerful
enough (comparative to the historical group) to
be an elite "power RB". I know Ingram dominated
in college, so did a many other RBs
historically...that alone is not enough. Ingram
is going to have to defy a lot of historical
data trends to fulfill becoming an elite NFL RB.
We're not saying he won't be good (although I'm
a skeptic that eh will be), the statistical
analysis is just not of a future elite RB.
Ingram is likely to go in the 1st Round,
although he should be a 2nd rounder. Ingram's
price tag as a 1st Rounder, and the red-flag
questions, makes this seem like a bad investment
coming for some team on Day 1 of the NFL Draft.
We will project Mark Ingram's 2011
Fantasy Football production in our 2011 "Big
Board" Draft Guide. The NFL season schedules are out
and the NFL Draft is almost upon us, so
the computers are geared up to start running
analysis on projecting players and situations
for 2011 -- our
2011 Fantasy
Football Draft Guide on sale this summer
(even if you don't play Fantasy Football you
might really enjoy this work) with
400+ players evaluated statistically for the
upcoming season!
Our Fantasy
Football Draft Guide is EVER-EVOLVING
!!!! Not like a stale magazine with outdated
data by the time it arrives on newsstands, and
is obsolete when the next big injury or
personnel move is made -- we update our player
projections and commentary as often as daily
(sometimes multiple times daily if news warrants
it)...we work just like your own personal "war
room" right up to Draft Day (see home page for
clips of some of last years work) and you can
access the e-Guide "at will" with your initial
purchase.
Select a position
from the tabs below
to see stats and scouting information for that respective
position.
By
